Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26082884›Full record

ArticleNanotechnology reviews2015

Nanotechnology for cancer treatment.

William H Gmeiner, Supratim Ghosh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nanotechnology reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Frontiers in oncology · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Nanotechnology as a Promising Method in the Treatment of Skin Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

William H GmeinerDepartment of Cancer Biology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 21757, USA; and Program of Molecular Genetics, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 21757, USA.
Supratim GhoshDepartment of Cancer Biology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 21757, USA; and Program of Molecular Genetics, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 21757, USA.

Funding

Tumor Tissue CoreP30CA012197 · NCI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Ruben A. Mesa · 1985 to 2026
$55.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA012197
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnology has the potential to increase the selectivity and potency of chemical, physical, and biological approaches for eliciting cancer cell death while minimizing collateral toxicity to nonmalignant cells. Materials on the nanoscale are increasingly being targeted to cancer cells with great specificity through both active and passive targeting. In this review, we summarize recent literature that has broken new ground in the use of nanotechnology for cancer treatment with an emphasis on targeted drug delivery.

Indexed as

cancerdrug-deliverynanotechnology

Identifiers

PMID26082884
PMCPMC4465796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.